My Thoughts on Warhammer 40K 10th Edition

 Dear James Workshop,

My thoughts on Warhammer 40,000: 10th Edition 

I have been a fan of Warhammer, and Warhammer 40,000 specifically, since picking up a copy of Rogue Trader at Games Day 1987

Since then I have, like most, been in and out of the hobby as life has happened. Some years things scaled back to me just browsing the monthly (or weekly) White Dwarf that arrived through my letter box.

I got back into table top gaming whilst WH 40K was in its 6th and 7th edition era. But I was playing other systems whilst ‘waiting’ for the hard reset that 8th Edition was rumoured to be. I was being told that it would be as dramatic as the End Times.

When 8th Edition landed I was pleased with the ease of access into the revised rules.

That truly was simplified, not simple.

It reminded me of the pleasure I had when 3rd Edition was launched in 1998

As 8th Edition morphed into 9th Edition things did become more complicated, but in my opinion the customisation available with relics and warlord traits was a huge appeal.

10th Edition launched with a hard reset once again!

After playing weekly for more than a year, I wanted to share my thoughts. I thought it was time to put down some of my initial impressions of how this hard reset of the rules is working out. 

The experience has been both good and bad, and often frustrating and at times puzzling.

Army Building

When I learned that Games Workshop had decided to no longer have units fall into the categories of HQ/Troops/Elite/Fast/Heavy I was initially disappointed. That system had been embedded since 3rd Edition Warhammer 40,000.

However, the new system is more flexible and allows my collections to form legal armies more easily.

At first glance it looked like a reset to 2nd Edition with Characters/Squads/Support being the basic building blocks. But without the percentage limits.

However, it is not as restrictive apart from the ‘rule of three’ and limits on aircraft etc, the force building system allows for most options to be viable.

Detachments

When I first learned about the introduction of Detachments I thought it might have been a return to Formations that featured in 7th Edition (not an addition a played, but was well aware of their impact).

However, when Codex: Space Marines was released and I learned that I could use my blue painted ‘Eagle Marines’ effectively as White Scars, Salamanders, Imperial Fists etc I liked what it represented.

For me personally it allowed me to create sub-armies that adopted that method of war. For example, my 8th Company Eagle Marines use Stormlance Task Force. Where as my 9th Company Eagle Marines use Anvil Siege Force Detachment.

Turn Sequence

Reducing the number of phases in a turn sequence does, on the face of it, seem like a good idea to speed up the game. But in my opinion removing the psychic phase and the morale phase has left both of these elements in limbo or no man’s land.

Psychic Powers

Psychic powers are now dispersed and appear on Unit Cards as either Ranged Attacks or as Abilities. Again, on the face of it, this seems logical that only Characters or Units with psychic abilities need to worry about casting powers.

However, I have found that many of the Psychic Abilities are in fact a variation on a Ranged Attack and would be better featuring as such, albeit with a few wording changes.

For example: Typhus has The Eater Plague (Psychic) Ability. It happens in the Shooting phase. So it could be Range 18” D6 Shots S12 AP -4 Damage D6 [Torrent, Hazardous, Devastating Wounds]

Other Psychic Abilities seem to happen randomly during a turn. For example the Knight Abominant has a Warp Storms attack that happens at the end of the Movement Phase!

My idea would be to have only two categories of Psychic Power.

The first would be a Ranged Attack, done in the Shooting Phase. Basically variations of Smite Attack.

The second category would be a Power that happened in the Command Phase. This could be Psychic ‘Healing’ or a Protection ‘Spell’ (For Example giving an Invulnerable Save for a Turn, or A Feel No Pain, or it could be a Buffing ‘Spell’ giving +1 Ballistic Skill etc

Moral Phase

Since the first edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battles the Morale element of the game has been present in one shape or form.

In 10th Edition Warhammer 40,000 we got Battle Shocked. I like the idea of replacing a version of Morale where troops Flee the Table. As I read somewhere these are Grim Dark Warriors and not likely to run from a fight.

However, including it in the Command Phase is a mistake.

It should be a test done in a reinstated Morale Phase at the end of Each Players Turn. Units below half strength take the test. Some units might already be Battle Shocked due to Abilities and Events earlier in that turn.

Units Remain Battle Shocked until they Rally

Units attempt to Rally (if they are Battle Shocked) at the start of their Command Phase.

Modifyers could apply at this point. For example: +1 to the test if the unit is on an Objective you control; -1 to the test in Engagement Range of the enemy.

Whilst on this topic, I will chip in with the thought that All Space Marines should have the rule:

They Shall Know no Fear which allows them to roll on 3 dice.

Unit Cards

I like the introduction of the Unit Cards, despite them becoming out of date frequently.

I use a fine pen to note on a card if its rules have been updated.

The decision to give every unit an ability was not a bad one, but in the heat of battle a unit’s unique ability is often forgotten until after dice have been rolled.

Some abilities feel like having a free CP to use on a Stratagem that might have cost 1CP in 9th Edition, but others feel like an afterthought.

Leaders

I liked the introduction of the concept of Leaders. However, it is not perfectly executed.

The main change required is to introduce an update to the Leader Ability wording.

At present Leaders get an Ability that begins “While this model is leading a unit……”

If this was changed across the board to “This unit can……”

Alternatively, as the word ‘Leader’ already appears as Core Ability the specific ability could be designated as [Leader Ability]

In any event a Leader should not forget his ability once his bodyguard are dead.

One other point to raise here is that there should be more options for ‘two leaders’ to join a unit if possible.

My Space Marines can take an Ancient with a Captain or Lieutenant. But a Chaplain cannot. An apothecary with a ‘higher ranking leader’ would be useful. There are several good ‘fluffy’ and not too overpowered combinations that are currently not possible.

My Genestealer Cuts fair a bit better. But even so, there are combinations not currently possible in the rules set. 

Weapon Profiles

Whilst I appreciate that is must have been a huge task to rewrite every weapon profile in the game, I think that there have been missed opportunities.

I might be wrong but Bolters; Bolt Guns & Bolt Rifles might be the most ‘shot’ weapon in the game.

Differentiating between those weapons, and who is holding it, is a really good way to introduce variation.

Chaos in particular have been treated well with the likes of Plague Boltgun [Lethal Hits] and Infernal Boltgun (extra AP)

However, Tactical Marines and Chaos Legionnaires still use the ‘classic’ Boltgun

There is an opportunity to introduce Astartes Bolters or Heretic Bolters

One big anomaly in my opinion is that the rare and revered Boltgun can often be seen in the hands of an Imperial Guardsman. Okay, he might be less effective with it as he has not got the Ballistic Skill of a Space Marine. But it will not be as well looked after. So, a ‘Militarum’ Bolter might be [Hazardous] or lower strength or shorter range.

Other weapon types have been given various names now. For example Lasconnons are not all the same. Which brings me onto my next point.

Weapons Key Words

The introduction of Key Words to weapons has mostly been good.

Some of the adopted terms that contradict previous editions seems a bad idea though.

Twin Linked for example really feels better representing hits not wounds.

On this topic, the decisions taken to designate Twin Linked seem to be very random and counter intuitive.

For example: Ballistus Dreadnought has a 2 shot Lascannon! This should definitely be 1 shot, twin linked. The same applies to Land Raider Godhammer Lasconnons! They are wysiwyg Twin Linked.

On the other hand, a Predator turret does have a Twin Linked Lascannon!

The most strange one to me is a Centurion with a Lasconnon in each hand (pointing in different directions) is 1 shot, Twin Linked.

Also, whilst on this topic, I think the downgrading of Melta weapons from 9th Edition has been handled badly and goes against their lore. A thermo heat ray should melt armour but at Strength 9 it often does not. I am ok with the reduction in range but the Strength should be 10 or even 12. Alternatively it could be Strength 8 (meting marine armour on 2+) but be [Anti-Vehicle 4+] so tanks do have a 50:50 chance of taking Damage. Some ‘special’ Meltas could even be [Anti-Vehicle 2+], and I am fine with that not being Monster/Vehicle.

Leviathan Missions/Periah Nexus Missions 

I began writing this letter just as the new Mission Deck was released.

Overall the new mission packs are good. Some of the Primary Missions are too complicated and not what is needed in an already complex game.

Some new deployment maps are unnecessary too. I sometimes go back to the Open War ones for variety.

Some of the secondaries are an immediate ‘no’

The changes to doing Actions are improvements. But unless you specifically build a list that has Performing Actions in mind, most are a waste of resources.

Stratagems 

Reducing the number of available Stratagems has generally been good. Having the Core Stratagems change so much from the Leviathan Rule Book seems a shame though.

Conclusion

In conclusion I think that 10th Edition, Warhammer 40,000 is playable and enjoyable.

Thank you for reading my thoughts.

Nick